Mortensen: Elliott Suspension Upheld **merged**

[Corso]

Okay.. I should get the heck gone, for the night.
I'm not going to say anything constructive to this site tonight, the way I'm going. And this new keyboard is driving me cray cray.
Buenas Suerte, homies!

 

[viman96]

Has anyone been suspended 6 games for DV in the last few years?

IIRC 2 out of 9 have since it became the default

 

[CowboyStar88]

That is a non sequitur. This is the first case where he has given the 6 game suspension. Other people saying it and using that as proof is the ad populum fallacy. You have not proven anyone to actually say that either. It has not been challenged yet. That is all that you have proven.

You understanding is not a rebuttal. It is an assertion without basis. He does need to prove conspiracy. The federal law that demands fairness in labor hearings has been quoted in this thread multiple times. The judge has been quoted discussing it lending the notion credibility.

It is up to you to support your assertions not for me to prove a negative.

You argue like a 6th grader

 

[ConceptCoop]

Editing my posts is dishonorable. I do not only characterizes and rely on it in entirely. That was what I was saying about you.

Your bets, playing the martyr, derisive characterizations as rebuttal, and tone are juvenile. It is what it is.

Let's cut the ad hominem stuff, yeah?

 

[ConceptCoop]

Has anyone been suspended 6 games for DV in the last few years?

Viman answered below, but I'm personally not certain.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Let's cut the ad hominem stuff, yeah?

Ad hominem means "to the man." I was saying editing my posts not you was dishonorable. It is misrepresenting what I wrote.

How about you quote me without editing out the inbetween part that makes your comment look baseless?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

IIRC 2 out of 9 have since it became the default

The NFL appears to have enforced its “baseline” six-game suspension against just two of 18 players publicly linked to domestic violence allegations since Goodell announced the new policy, according to a B/R Mag examination. Of the two NFL players known to have actually received six-game suspensions linked to abuse claims since August 2014, one was already a free agent and the other was former Lions offensive lineman Rodney Austin.

http://mag.bleacherreport.com/nfl-domestic-violence-policy-suspensions/

 

[ConceptCoop]

Ad hominem means "to the man." I was saying editing my posts not you was dishonorable. It is misrepresenting what I wrote.

How about you quote me without editing out the inbetween part that makes your comment look baseless?

ad ho·mi·nem
ˌad ˈhämənəm/
adverb & adjective1.

1. (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
   "vicious ad hominem attacks"2.
2. relating to or associated with a particular person.
   "the office was created ad hominem for Fenton"

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Let's cut the ad hominem stuff, yeah?

You don't know what ad hominem means.

I'm talking about what you are doing and not you. Misquoting is dishonorable. Deal with it.

 

[viman96]

http://mag.bleacherreport.com/nfl-domestic-violence-policy-suspensions/

wow worse than I recall. thanks for the link.

 

[ConceptCoop]

You don't know what ad hominem means.

I'm talking about what you are doing and not you. Misquoting is dishonorable. Deal with it.

Ad hominem, short for argumentum ad hominem, is where an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

ad ho·mi·nem
ˌad ˈhämənəm/
adverb & adjective1.

1. (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
   "vicious ad hominem attacks"2.
2. relating to or associated with a particular person.
   "the office was created ad hominem for Fenton"

You made a characterization based on a misquote. That was your position and I addressed it.

I never said you are dishonorable so your arguments are to be ignored. That is how an ad hominem goes.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Ad hominem, short for argumentum ad hominem, is where an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.

You misquoting me is an act of yours. It is not your "character, motive, or other attribute."

 

[ConceptCoop]

You misquoting me is an act of yours. It is not your "character, motive, or other attribute."

"Your bets, playing the martyr, derisive characterizations as rebuttal, and tone are juvenile."

"you argue like a 7th grader."

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

"Your bets, playing the martyr, derisive characterizations as rebuttal, and tone are juvenile."

"you argue like a 7th grader."

If that was my only argument then you would have a point. Those behaviors are juvenile. Deal with it.

I notice that you have surrendered merit entirely after I addressed your "rebuttals" and are now intent on this whinging.

Shall I repost the post that you ignored?

 

[ConceptCoop]

You misquoting me is an act of yours. It is not your "character, motive, or other attribute."

I quoted the portions of your quote that were relevant to the joke. To call that dishonorable is to make a statement on my intentions. I'm an internet lifer and have never been accused of being dishonorable for doing that. I didn't even realize it was taboo, assuming it is and you're not simply on one.

If you meant to say that it's okay to characterize as long as you also rebute--and if we take your work for my lack of rebuttals--then I can see how you could question my motives. But that wasn't how I took it. I obviously wasn't trying to misquote you--there is very clearly a record of everything you said. I was simply pointing to the two relevant portions of your post. I suppose I could have bolded them, but again, I never would have thought it was an issue.

It was not my intention to offend you and I'm sorry I did.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I quoted the portions of your quote that were relevant to the joke. To call that dishonorable is to make a statement on my intentions. I'm an internet lifer and have never been accused of being dishonorable for doing that. I didn't even realize it was taboo, assuming it is and you're not simply on one.

If you meant to say that it's okay to characterize as long as you also rebute--and if we take your work for my lack of rebuttals--then I can see how you could question my motives. But that wasn't how I took it. I obviously wasn't trying to misquote you--there is very clearly a record of everything you said. I was simply pointing to the two relevant portions of your post. I suppose I could have bolded them, but again, I never would have thought it was an issue.

It was not my intention to offend you and I'm sorry I did.

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/mor...ion-upheld-merged.384411/page-37#post-7485815

I guess I did need to link it for you.

 

[ConceptCoop]

If that was my only argument then you would have a point. Those behaviors are juvenile. Deal with it.

I notice that you have surrendered merit entirely after I addressed your "rebuttals" and are now intent on this whinging.

Shall I repost the post that you ignored?

We both know that you'll do whatever makes you feel good about yourself--so go ahead. No need to threaten.

I'm actually trying to look into your claims in between this little spat. I'm open to being wrong. The first article I found suggests that I very well might have been. If I have a rebutal after doing a bit more digging, I'll get back to you.

 

[ConceptCoop]

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/mor...ion-upheld-merged.384411/page-37#post-7485815

I guess I did need to link it for you.

I'm psychic!

 

[ConceptCoop]

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/mor...ion-upheld-merged.384411/page-37#post-7485815

I guess I did need to link it for you.

I have to logoff for a bit. If you if you have anything else to say about me...err...what I do, feel free to send me a PM. I'm sure we're the only two getting anything out of this.